The Brookings Institution has issued a study examining the likelihood of students to engage in SAT/ACT test prep broken down by family income and ethnicity.

[Excerpts]

In this report, we review the (somewhat limited) evidence on who uses test preparation (or “test prep”) and how effective it is at improving scores. We begin by showing how the use of test prep varies by race and socioeconomic status using nationally representative data on the high school class of 2013. Not surprisingly, high school juniors from low- and middle-class families are less likely to have engaged in specific test prep activities and taken the SAT or ACT than their economically better-off peers. Disaggregating by race, we find that Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) students are by far the most likely to have prepared for and taken the SAT or ACT, followed by Black, white, and Hispanic students.

While the paucity of high-quality studies makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions, the evidence suggests that test prep can affect scores enough to matter for admissions. But test prep per se can only go so far for students who have not mastered the math, language, and other skills covered on the exam, and those growing up in higher-income families enjoy many educational advantages relative to their lower-income peers. Test prep likely accounts for a small share of the enormous class gaps in test scores, which are also present for in-school measures of academic preparation such as high school grades and course-taking. While ensuring access to test prep opportunities is important considering the continuing relevance of the test, it won’t be enough to meaningfully close the class gaps in test scores or enrollment in college.

Private tutoring has also grown in popularity but comes with an even higher price tag. For example, the Princeton Review’s SAT private tutoring costs between $175 and $364 per hour. Between 1997 and 2022, the number of private tutoring centers more than tripled, from 3,000 to 10,000. Private tutoring centers tend to be concentrated in areas with high income and parental education and high shares of Asian American families. College admissions test prep is not the only service these tutoring centers provide, but these results still point to differences in demand for and access to this form of intensive test prep across socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity.

Unsurprisingly, differences in test preparation and completion by socioeconomic status are substantial. We divide students into quintiles based on the index of socioeconomic status (SES) available in the survey (based on parent/guardians’ education, occupation, and family income). Among students in the first, second, and third quintiles of SES, just over half had not prepared for nor taken the SAT/ACT when surveyed in their junior spring. The share of juniors who had prepared for the exam, taken it at least once, or both is higher among students in the fourth (56%) and fifth (69%) quintiles of socioeconomic status. These findings are consistent with other research that finds that students with higher parental income are significantly more likely to prep for the SAT through a private course or tutor than their lower-SES peers.

Differences in test prep use across racial/ethnic groups do not necessarily mirror racial/ethnic gaps in test performance. AAPI students are the most likely to have completed test prep, taken the exam, or both (65%), Black and white students have similar rates (56% and 55%, respectively), and Hispanic students have the lowest rates (47%) of having taken or prepared for an admissions test.1 Conversations about racial and ethnic disparities on the SAT have increased attention to the need to mitigate test score inequalities. In turn, high schools, colleges, and community organizations have increased outreach and test preparation activities for minority students, which could explain why Black students have similar rates of test prep and test taking as white students. However, it seems that this outreach has been less effective in raising test prep use among Hispanic students, who are the least likely to have taken the SAT/ACT, taken a prep course, or both.

 
TRIBlive (western Pennsylvania) covers the growing acceptance of the Classic Learning Test as a substitute for SAT/ACT, spurred by Duquesne University's adoption of the exam:

[Excerpts]

The SAT, accepted by almost all of the nearly 4,000 colleges and universities in the U.S., may have some growing competition.

The Classic Learning Test (CLT) has proved quite the competitor against other admissions exams, including the SAT and ACT.

Since its release in 2015, the CLT has reached more than 300 partner institutions across the country. As of last week, Duquesne University is included in that list.

Joel Bauman, Duquesne’s senior vice president of enrollment, said the university hopes to make its education more accessible by accepting the CLT as part of its admissions process.

“We assess our admissions practices annually,” he said.

Bauman said Duquesne prioritizes a “holistic review process.” The approach includes a faculty admissions committee that allows Duquesne educators to learn firsthand how to effectively advise students throughout both the admissions process and post-admission.

Through the process, he said, the admissions team learned that home-schooled and Catholic school students might benefit more from the CLT, which centers its content around teaching the classics.

Unlike the SAT and ACT, which focus on testing by a standard core curriculum, questions on the CLT are inspired by the teachings of people including Plato, Jane Austen and Frederick Douglass, he said.

The exam is the shortest among college entrance tests, taking two hours, excluding breaks, compared to the SAT’s two hours and 14 minutes, and the ACT’s two hours and 55 minutes.

The test is then graded on a point scale of zero to 120 by Classic Learning Initiatives, the company that creates and administers the CLT.

Eleventh and 12th grade students can take the exam through their high school, if it is a proctor of the CLT, or by using the exam’s remote proctoring option to take the test from home on a scheduled exam date.

Bauman said accepting the CLT is part of Duquesne University’s “test flexible” admissions strategy, which encourages prospective students to submit whichever test score they feel best represents their academic abilities.
Differing from its competitors, there is no charge to send CLT test scores to prospective colleges or universities.

While smaller private institutions are moving in the CLT direction, public state schools have yet to follow suit.

 
Clearly demonstrating how fixated parents are regarding getting their children into prestigious colleges and universities, Rick Singer, the mastermind of the Varsity Blues college admissions scandal, is once again advising families and students, according to NBC News.

[Excerpts]

William "Rick" Singer, the mastermind of a nationwide college admissions cheating scheme, can work as a college consultant again so long as he discloses his criminal record to new clients, a federal judge ruled on Monday.

Singer, 62, pleaded guilty in 2019 to racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, and other charges related to the scandal, known as Operation Varsity Blues. He was sentenced to 3½ years in prison in 2023, but was released to a halfway house in Los Angeles last year.

Upon his release from prison, Singer launched a new company, ID Future Stars, to advise prospective undergraduates on their college applications. Chief District Judge Denise Casper ruled that Singer can continue his work as a college consultant so long as the following statement is "prominently" on his company's website:

“In March 2019, Rick Singer pled guilty to federal charges including racketeering conspiracy, money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to defraud the United States, and obstruction of justice for his role in what was widely-publicized as the ‘Varsity Blues’ college admissions scheme," the statement reads.

"Specifically, Mr. Singer admitted to, among other things: bribing standardized test proctors and administrators to engage in cheating on college entrance exams (i.e., the SAT and ACT); falsifying students’ academic transcripts by paying third parties to take classes in their names; falsifying students’ college applications with fake awards, athletic activities, and fabricated essays; and bribing college athletic coaches and administrators, through purported donations to their programs and personal bribes, to designate students as athletic recruits based on falsified athletic credentials," it continues.

"As part of the scheme, Mr. Singer took in more than $25 million from his clients, from which he made payments to co-conspirators totaling more than $7 million, and transferred, spent, or otherwise used more than $15 million for his own benefit. On January 4, 2023, a federal court in Boston sentenced Mr. Singer to 42 months in prison and three years of supervised release. He was also ordered to pay more than $10 million in restitution and to forfeit assets totaling more than $8.7 million," it concludes.

Casper added that written copies of the statement must be provided to parents, students, or other entities seeking to retain Singer.

 

ABC News also covers the return of Rick Singer as a college consultant, with some choice words from others in the industry:

[Excerpts]

Fresh out of federal prison, the mastermind behind the college admissions scam known as “Operation Varsity Blues” is back with a new job: college admissions advising.

William “Rick” Singer was released early from the Bureau of Prisons’ custody on March 25 and, according to a recent legal filing, is living in California and working for ID Future Stars, an “admissions consulting company owned by his sister.”

The company’s website lists Singer as the “master coach and lead advisor” and includes a note from him saying he “made a mistake (and) took full responsibility.”

Federal prosecutors had “concerns” about Singer’s return to work in college admissions advising, given his criminal history in a case that also netted actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin, they said in a filing of their own.

But Singer’s defense attorney argued his work in college admissions advising is “both lawful and entirely consistent with the conditions of his supervised release,” and asked the court to allow him to continue with his work.

“The purely theoretical risk of recidivism does not warrant a prophylactic field-of-employment restriction here,” attorney Aaron Katz said.
Singer’s plan to return to college admissions advising has raised eyebrows among some of those working in the field.

“That is insane,” Brian Taylor, the managing partner of Ivy Coach, an elite college counseling firm, told CNN. “This is the equivalent of Bernie Madoff asking to manage your money from prison.”

The website of ID Future Stars, a college admissions consulting company, boasts “20+ Years of Experience” and “98% Success Rate (Up to).”

On its About page, the website names Singer as the “master coach and lead advisor” and includes a message from him.

“I am not afraid to tell people who I am and that I made a mistake, took full responsibility and want to share my expertise, passion, and desire to help shape our next generation’s leaders by helping each find a college and career that is the right choice for each individual,” he writes on the site.

He writes that he learned “to stay away from the gray areas in college admissions and institutional advancement” and says he “will fiercely seek the proper guidance and support from expert counsel.”

In court filings last month, federal prosecutors took issue with Singer’s statements, calling them “misleading and problematic” regarding his role in the “Varsity Blues” scheme. They asked the court to require Singer to post a fuller explanation of the facts of his case and the charges against him on the website.

“The government cannot stand idly by and allow the fox in the hen house without voicing its concerns to the Court and Probation,” prosecutors said.